Isn't this sort of similar to sports fans? Even if a team is an underdog you can find fans who will swear on the life of their unborn child that their team will win the Superbowl World Series Cup. Are the losers derided for believing in their team? "You must have been an idiot to think your team would win. Look how delusional you were!"

Silly Jesus:Isn't this sort of similar to sports fans? Even if a team is an underdog you can find fans who will swear on the life of their unborn child that their team will win the Superbowl World Series Cup. Are the losers derided for believing in their team? "You must have been an idiot to think your team would win. Look how delusional you were!"

/mostly serious

Delusional sports fans are left to their delusions 1) because that's part of the fun, and 2) because, unlike politics, pushing a false narrative doesn't get people killed.

BKITU:Silly Jesus: Isn't this sort of similar to sports fans? Even if a team is an underdog you can find fans who will swear on the life of their unborn child that their team will win the Superbowl World Series Cup. Are the losers derided for believing in their team? "You must have been an idiot to think your team would win. Look how delusional you were!"

/mostly serious

Delusional sports fans are left to their delusions 1) because that's part of the fun, and 2) because, unlike politics, pushing a false narrative doesn't get people killed.

Yeah, that's why is wasn't completely serious.

The rabid delusions seem quite similar though...just different consequences.

BKITU:Silly Jesus: Isn't this sort of similar to sports fans? Even if a team is an underdog you can find fans who will swear on the life of their unborn child that their team will win the Superbowl World Series Cup. Are the losers derided for believing in their team? "You must have been an idiot to think your team would win. Look how delusional you were!"

/mostly serious

Delusional sports fans are left to their delusions 1) because that's part of the fun, and 2) because, unlike politics, pushing a false narrative doesn't get people killed.

Follow-up question for you then...

You obviously think it important for people to make informed decisions as to not suffer drastic negative consequences (getting people killed). Would you be in favor of voters having to demonstrate some modicum of intelligence / relevant knowledge prior to voting?

You obviously think it important for people to make informed decisions as to not suffer drastic negative consequences (getting people killed). Would you be in favor of voters having to demonstrate some modicum of intelligence / relevant knowledge prior to voting?

The voter test? Again? Give it the fark up. You aren't allowed to disenfranchise voters, and you aren't allowed to change the rules of the game because you arrogantly see yourself as more informed that the general populace.

You obviously think it important for people to make informed decisions as to not suffer drastic negative consequences (getting people killed). Would you be in favor of voters having to demonstrate some modicum of intelligence / relevant knowledge prior to voting?

No, but I would greatly prefer that those either in power, or achieving to power, not push false narratives that get people killed.

A large percentage of the voting population being idiots is a necessary, but unfortunate, side-effect of preserving the right to vote for everyone. If you're trying to make real the ideal of "all men are created equal," then even people who have fewer functioning neurons than teeth in their heads have to be included in that. The sociopathy of political elites who are willing to use that idiocy to gain or retain power by any means, even those means that are patently evil, is what pisses me off.

Facts are simple and facts are straightFacts are lazy and facts are lateFacts all come with points of viewFacts don't do what I want them toFacts just twist the truth aroundFacts are living turned inside outFacts are getting the best of themFacts are nothing on the face of thingsFacts don't stain the furnitureFacts go out and slam the doorFacts are written all over your faceFacts continue to change their shape

Silly Jesus:Would you be in favor of voters having to demonstrate some modicum of intelligence / relevant knowledge prior to voting?

sure (all the questions are true or false)1) president obama was born in america2) president obama is a christian3) the universe is over 8000 years old4) evolution is a fact. our understanding of its processes are theoretical5) there were and are no weapons of mass destruction in iraq6) 9/11 really happened

we dont even need to LET the voter know the right answerif they answer false for 1 of the questions, their vote doesnt countif they answer false to 2-5 of the questions, their vote wont count for the rest of their lifeif they answer false to all 6 questions, they are taken out back and shot

You obviously think it important for people to make informed decisions as to not suffer drastic negative consequences (getting people killed). Would you be in favor of voters having to demonstrate some modicum of intelligence / relevant knowledge prior to voting?

The voter test? Again? Give it the fark up. You aren't allowed to disenfranchise voters, and you aren't allowed to change the rules of the game because you arrogantly see yourself as more informed that the general populace.

You obviously think it important for people to make informed decisions as to not suffer drastic negative consequences (getting people killed). Would you be in favor of voters having to demonstrate some modicum of intelligence / relevant knowledge prior to voting?

No, but I would greatly prefer that those either in power, or achieving to power, not push false narratives that get people killed.

A large percentage of the voting population being idiots is a necessary, but unfortunate, side-effect of preserving the right to vote for everyone. If you're trying to make real the ideal of "all men are created equal," then even people who have fewer functioning neurons than teeth in their heads have to be included in that. The sociopathy of political elites who are willing to use that idiocy to gain or retain power by any means, even those means that are patently evil, is what pisses me off.

Well said.

I reluctantly agree that that may be the reality that we are stuck with. Idealistically, I still yearn for an informed and intelligent electorate making life and death decisions concerning me and my family.

namatad:Silly Jesus: Would you be in favor of voters having to demonstrate some modicum of intelligence / relevant knowledge prior to voting?

sure (all the questions are true or false)1) president obama was born in america2) president obama is a christian3) the universe is over 8000 years old4) evolution is a fact. our understanding of its processes are theoretical5) there were and are no weapons of mass destruction in iraq6) 9/11 really happened

we dont even need to LET the voter know the right answerif they answer false for 1 of the questions, their vote doesnt countif they answer false to 2-5 of the questions, their vote wont count for the rest of their lifeif they answer false to all 6 questions, they are taken out back and shot

The source of the term is a quotation in an October 17, 2004, The New York Times Magazine article by writer Ron Suskind, quoting an unnamed aide to George W. Bush (later attributed to Karl Rove[1]):

The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." ... "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality-judiciously, as you will-we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors...and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."

There is something that all the Republicans seem to be missing from this last election....

1) They believed the election would be like 2010 and more voters would identify as Republicans.2) They believed they were winning the independent vote so they couldn't loose.3) They believe that 3 million Republican just didn't show up to vote.

The truth is that the only reason Romney won with independents and the turnout for self identified Republicans was so low was because: Those who identified themselves as Republicans in 2010 no longer identify as Republicans, instead they identify as independents but pretty much still vote Republican. So the truth was that Obama actually won the true independents.

/If Republicans don't realize the truth in the next couple of years, those ex-Republicans might actually be up for grabs.

So many people are saying that Obama won because the demographics are changing. I don't think that is wholly true. Although the demographics of the country are different than they were 20 years ago, so is the Republican Party. They have become undeniably weird. I can't picture Bob Dole talking about God's rape babies.

Of course, it's not only that Obama is a much bigger liar and distorter of reality, it's that the media doesn't call him on it because they're in the tank for him. If they're not helping him lie then they're actively working to give him a pass on everything he screws up.

FTA: At the policy level, this is the GOP that denies climate change, that rejects Keynesian economics, and that identifies voter fraud where there is none. At the loony-tunes level, this is the GOP that has given us the birthers, websites purporting that Obama was lying about Osama bin Laden's death, and not one but two (failed) senatorial candidates who redefined rape in defiance of medical science and simple common sense. It's the GOP that demands the rewriting of history (and history textbooks), still denying that Barry Goldwater's opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Richard Nixon's "southern strategy" transformed the party of Lincoln into a haven for racists. Such is the conservative version of history that when the website Right Wing News surveyed 43 popular conservative bloggers to determine the "worst figures in American history" two years ago, Jimmy Carter, Obama, and FDR led the tally, all well ahead of Benedict Arnold, Timothy McVeigh, and John Wilkes Booth.

WTF? I'm pretty much a Bernie Sanders-leaning liberal, but I would never rank a single GOP politician, not even W., as being as bad as those three.

Aldon:Those who identified themselves as Republicans in 2010 no longer identify as Republicans, instead they identify as independents but pretty much still vote Republican.

this is the tea party. they fancy themselves as "independent," but what they are is simply the farthest right, most racially motivated wing of the republican party. they are the GOP's "republican guards."

namatad:Silly Jesus: Would you be in favor of voters having to demonstrate some modicum of intelligence / relevant knowledge prior to voting?

sure (all the questions are true or false)1) president obama was born in america2) president obama is a christian3) the universe is over 8000 years old4) evolution is a fact. our understanding of its processes are theoretical5) there were and are no weapons of mass destruction in iraq6) 9/11 really happened

we dont even need to LET the voter know the right answerif they answer false for 1 of the questions, their vote doesnt countif they answer false to 2-5 of the questions, their vote wont count for the rest of their lifeif they answer false to all 6 questions, they are taken out back and shot

TADAproblem solved

You do realize that if this was a serious statement you would be sinking to their level, right?

It's not that complicated: By definition, a "conservative" belief system resists new influences and information that contradicts what one already holds to be good and true. Even self-proclaimed conservatives (at least the thoughtful ones) will agree with that.

Therefore, when conservatives lose, the only options are 1) that they didn't REALLY lose; or 2) that the people who won must not be on the side of things which are good and true, because they are not conservative.

cman:namatad: Silly Jesus: Would you be in favor of voters having to demonstrate some modicum of intelligence / relevant knowledge prior to voting?

sure (all the questions are true or false)1) president obama was born in america2) president obama is a christian3) the universe is over 8000 years old4) evolution is a fact. our understanding of its processes are theoretical5) there were and are no weapons of mass destruction in iraq6) 9/11 really happened

we dont even need to LET the voter know the right answerif they answer false for 1 of the questions, their vote doesnt countif they answer false to 2-5 of the questions, their vote wont count for the rest of their lifeif they answer false to all 6 questions, they are taken out back and shot

TADAproblem solved

You do realize that if this was a serious statement you would be sinking to their level, right?

Silly Jesus:cman: namatad: Silly Jesus: Would you be in favor of voters having to demonstrate some modicum of intelligence / relevant knowledge prior to voting?

sure (all the questions are true or false)1) president obama was born in america2) president obama is a christian3) the universe is over 8000 years old4) evolution is a fact. our understanding of its processes are theoretical5) there were and are no weapons of mass destruction in iraq6) 9/11 really happened

we dont even need to LET the voter know the right answerif they answer false for 1 of the questions, their vote doesnt countif they answer false to 2-5 of the questions, their vote wont count for the rest of their lifeif they answer false to all 6 questions, they are taken out back and shot

TADAproblem solved

You do realize that if this was a serious statement you would be sinking to their level, right?

I know you are kidding and all, but still...

Their level is a desire for competent and informed people to vote?

No, shooting people for not believing what they believe is what I meant

cman:Silly Jesus: cman: namatad: Silly Jesus: Would you be in favor of voters having to demonstrate some modicum of intelligence / relevant knowledge prior to voting?

sure (all the questions are true or false)1) president obama was born in america2) president obama is a christian3) the universe is over 8000 years old4) evolution is a fact. our understanding of its processes are theoretical5) there were and are no weapons of mass destruction in iraq6) 9/11 really happened

we dont even need to LET the voter know the right answerif they answer false for 1 of the questions, their vote doesnt countif they answer false to 2-5 of the questions, their vote wont count for the rest of their lifeif they answer false to all 6 questions, they are taken out back and shot

TADAproblem solved

You do realize that if this was a serious statement you would be sinking to their level, right?

I know you are kidding and all, but still...

Their level is a desire for competent and informed people to vote?

No, shooting people for not believing what they believe is what I meant

Xythero:So many people are saying that Obama won because the demographics are changing. I don't think that is wholly true. Although the demographics of the country are different than they were 20 years ago, so is the Republican Party. They have become undeniably weird. I can't picture Bob Dole talking about God's rape babies.

Romney got the same percentage of the white vote as Reagan. It's changing demographic + Republicans not appealing to that changing demographic. Romney probably wins with Dubya's Latino support levels.

That article was dead-on. The only disagreement I had was that the author believes, in contrast to the GOP, that Obama has a mandate. I still think it was a very close election; and I don't want any president to walk around boasting of a "mandate," as if he has unanimous approval.

Xythero:So many people are saying that Obama won because the demographics are changing. I don't think that is wholly true. Although the demographics of the country are different than they were 20 years ago, so is the Republican Party. They have become undeniably weird. I can't picture Bob Dole talking about God's rape babies.

I had hope that the demographics ARE changing. There would be ever fewer on the left side of the bell curve who were believing the shiate.

Example: In Ohio the very faithful the "Jeep jobs will be sent to China" lie was aimed at had direct personal knowledge that it was a lie and the Romney team, thinking they only needed to repeat the big lie to get it work, wouldn't back down, and lost Ohio.

Of course, it's not only that Obama is a much bigger liar and distorter of reality, it's that the media doesn't call him on it because they're in the tank for him. If they're not helping him lie then they're actively working to give him a pass on everything he screws up.

You keep hoping and wishing our President will screw up... sooner or later one of your Obama's Katrina! Obama-gate! accusations will really amount to something, then you can be happy about our country suffering.

/frankly I am amazed that Obama has not had a scandal in his first term, unlike every other President in my lifetime. It would be genius level amazing if he does the same on his second term.